The demo site seems to work without javascripts, and the main site’s “Why this exists” lists “an interface that works with JavaScript switched off” as one of the reasons.

What do you do when you, for example, go to pay your utility bills or plan a trip, and the sites required don’t work?

Bills can be set for automatic payment directly through the bank or with checks by postal service.

Plan a trip? lol, I don’t have the ability to do that, for many reasons.

I’m sorry to keep asking versions of this question

You’re fine; I don’t mind.

I know it’s a joke but surely to post it, and after your other comments, instead of seeing this as a huge obstacle, you seem to see it as a blessing?

With regard to browsing the web, yes. Regarding potentially-useful services which disallow me from accessing them due to my disallowing them to run arbitrary scripts on my computer, that’s disappointing, yes.

I’m far stranger than you realize. My stance on javascripts is only one aspect of me that’s abnormal. I’m also transgender and try my best to protect my privacy in lots of different ways. Life has continued to become more and more difficult, and I live in a constant state of dread. I resent the world for doing this to people like me, for deciding that our suffering is not only inconsequential but mandatory. It doesn’t have to be this way, and it shouldn’t have to be this way, and yet it is. The world has decided that privacy is to die, and all like me are to go with it. But for now, I continue to exist.

Sorry for the bleak response. And in a meme thread no less ^^'. I hope I’m at least somewhat entertaining.

It has been a standard for quite some time to not load entire pages again if a user clicks on something or scrolls below visible area

Yes, and I hate that. The alternative gives me a complete page which is accessible with or without an active internet connection. The standard you like is a worse experience for me. Loading complete pages without javascripts is aways a faster and better experience than sites which hide content behind a javascript ‘paywall’. I think I’ll start calling it that from now on, because that’s what it is to me, a javascript paywall.

I wanted to ask you how are you even using YouTube

I don’t use GAFAM serivices. If I want to access content which is controlled by youtube (rare), then I use an invidious instance. If I want comments to load, I load the page with the tag specifying non-javascript mode.

I don’t know man.

Please don’t say that to me.

nearly all sites use it

Yep, and the ones that don’t work without it are what I call broken, and those are not sites that I care to use.

I don’t even consider people who have it disabled as I treat them same as bots.

To quote you: “This seems extreme.”

But it’s your decision, just like it’s my decision to not bother with sites like that. I’m not sure if you’re trying to convince me to comply, but that is exactly what makes me avoid a site. I don’t put up with that sort of thing anymore. It’s not worth my time.

Imagine saying “Windows is less secure than Linux, so I’m not going to make any of my apps work on windows”.

Are you unaware of Free and Open Source Software (FOSS) and that there are plenty of developers who don’t bother making things for closed systems like Windows? It’s not weird at all.

It’s like instead of dealing with it, learning how to be safer, etc, you’re shutting out.

How am I not “dealing with it” ? I don’t value sites which mistreat me, and so I avoid them. I am happier as a result. I have more comfort and self-respect, and I lose nothing.

From another of my comments:

Without javascripts, I get neat and tidy static pages that load super fast. I can have dozens of them loaded in separate tabs on my Librem 5 or Pinephone, which only have 3GB of RAM. It’s nice and comfy.

With javascripts, I get a bad experience involving

• ads
• trackers
• cookie notices
• popups & overlays
• obnoxious “chat” features
• long wait times for everything to load
• new elements pushing other elements around as they load
• pages which automatically reload/refresh without my consent
• useless effects like blur which slow down the pages significantly
• “infinite scroll” pages which fuck up my calm navigation of the page
• poorly-designed pages which aren’t easy to fix with things like web dev tools or ublock origin
• captchas
• etc. etc. etc.

I’m not seeking to convince web devs like you to design your sites to my liking, but you shouldn’t expect people like me to want to use your sites if they’re broken.

It’s rarely ever worth it to comply with the demand to allow scripts, and I resent that it is so often a demand rather than a suggestion.

It’s really just a matter of value. Odds are that I won’t value the sites even if I comply, so I just don’t bother (most of the time). Most of the web will continue to have all of the anti-features which repel me, so I’ll continue with my avoidance. I’ve adapted to the way of things. I’d like to run some services myself one day, to add to the web in a positive way, and to host my own communities. I hope that day arrives.

I’m not sure why you’re quoting me there when that is not a direct quote. Other users were insisting that most of the internet “is broken” without javascript, and I simply agreed with them.

From my experience, I’d say that maybe around 50% to 70% of the time, a website I open in a new tab shows the signs of being a broken site, and I usually don’t bother to check further. Sometimes I do check and find that the site is indeed broken, but other times I find that it’s fixable.

But yeah, it feels like at least about half of the sites I randomly try to open in a new tab end up appearing broken. I’m not sure what you’re suggesting is a normal percentage, so idk if that guestimate seems reasonable or unreasonable to you. But I’ve been browsing the web like this for the past several years, so I do have a good bit of experience with this sorta thing, and that’s my honest assessment. It’s very common, but there are still lots of sites which are functional, so the web continues to have things of value to offer to me.

If 90%+ of the web doesn’t work with js off then you’re either predetermining that you just won’t use 90% of the web.

You put the “either” part, but I think you forgot to put the “or” part, which in my case here is that I used to allow javascripts for all sites and access all of the worst most popular ones but have come to realize over years of experience that the javascript-dependent ones are extremely likely to be god-awful experiences (to me). So I don’t tend to bother with them anymore. That doesn’t mean I don’t occasionally get curious and investigate. It’s just that my investigations do not deviate from my expectations. So I continue to conclude the same: that things have not improved (and in fact, they have gotten worse over time).

You’ve decided that ahead of time, so you cannot really say “these sites suck” because you haven’t even been able to use them.

Based on my past experiences and random experiments, yes, I continue to conclude that those types of sites suck. The commonality is the requirement of the user to allow javascripts, which I see as forced self-harm at this point.

But the way you’re presenting it, you don’t have any trouble and just use most sites. Which I happen to know is not possible.

Idk how it seems that I actively use most sites. I would think that’s impossible of any human. I recognize patterns, and the one that’s relevant here is the quality/value (to me) of javascript-dependent sites.

Without javascripts, I get neat and tidy static pages that load super fast. I can have dozens of them loaded in separate tabs on my Librem 5 or Pinephone, which only have 3GB of RAM. It’s nice and comfy.

With javascripts, I get a bad experience involving

• ads
• trackers
• cookie notices
• popups & overlays
• obnoxious “chat” features
• long wait times for everything to load
• new elements pushing other elements around as they load
• pages which automatically reload/refresh without my consent
• useless effects like blur which slow down the pages significantly
• “infinite scroll” pages which fuck up my calm navigation of the page
• poorly-designed pages which aren’t easy to fix with things like web dev tools or ublock origin
• captchas
• etc. etc. etc.

There are so many things I hate about these types of sites, and the ones which require javascript tend to have at least a few of these awful “features”. And another major bad experience is the first one: being given a demand in order to access the page, being required to allow javascript, especially the condescending messages that are like “sorry this is required” or “you must allow javascript”. The demands are toxic/hostile and then the javascript elements themselves are an affront. The whole experience is always terrible (to me). I just want to get what I was seeking and leave in a rush to gtfo of there. It’s never pleasant for me.

Hopefully this was more clear and to the point, but if there’s anything else, please let me know and I’ll address it. I am probably the most talkative person on this platform when I actually have people and a topic.

Though, sorry again for another wall of text. It is really easy for me to just keep going and is kinda difficult to hold myself back. And again, I don’t intend for any of this to come across in a negative light. It can be difficult to create a text-based vibe that matches what I’m trying to convey sometimes. Probably doesn’t help that I’m almost always sleep-deprived.

And now I’m struggling to finish this comment, so how about an emoji 🩷

Þat one does seem to be þe best option for what I’d want. If/when I am ever able to get around to setting up a server of my own, I’ll probably try to setup a sourcehut instance. And I’ll probably try to upload a compressed svg here first þough, but I just need to double-triple check everyþing in it before doing so. I do procrastinate a lot, so expect delays. ^^’

@cley_faye@lemmy.world Bugs exists. But JavaScript running in the browser have, theoretically, little access to anything. […]

The risk of allowing JavaScript on a website is more tied to the site data, or tracking. […]

It doesn’t mean every site needs JavaScript, but having this enabled by default is not that big of a security risk for the system. […]

This reminds me of an interesting phenomenon: Some security-oriented people praise the security of the surveillance-advertising corporation’s browser engine (chromium), while proclaiming that gecko-based browsers (firefox) are unusable due to inferior security. Yet the main security threat I see is that fucking surveillance-advertising corporation which spreads unvetted and often malicious ads around the web without a care in the world.

@OwOarchist@pawb.social Honestly, it’s bonkers that the standard, default approach for all mainstream browsers is to let every random website in the world run any arbitrary code it wants on your computer.

This, this, 1000 times this! That is exactly how I feel and was hoping to convey.

@OwOarchist@pawb.social Yeah, they usually attempt to sandbox it, but still. Sometimes sandboxes can be escaped. And sometimes the code can do significant harm while still inside its sandbox.

Yes, defense-in-depth includes minimizing threats rather than simply relying on protections. It shouldn’t be necessary to lower one’s shields constantly, and it’s better to avoid doing so if possible, from a security & privacy perspective.

Okay, I’m going to reply to this message with my responses to various quoted comments from the big chain of comments which I can’t directly access from this instance, due to defederation with certain instances. I’m not going to respond to literally every message, but I hope you all know that I do appreciate you for participating in this thread and being part of a really fun and interesting chain.

Thanks for all the comments and sorry for not responding until now. Since I can’t upvote any of the comments in that chain, to all of you I provide lots of hearts: 🩷🩷🩷🩷🩷🩷🩷🩷🩷🩷🩷🩷🩷🩷🩷🩷🩷🩷🩷🩷🩷🩷🩷🩷🩷🩷🩷🩷🩷🩷

practically no one is building websites to work without JavaScript. I think that sucks

I legitimately believe that most websites suck, and that is one of the reasons. If I enable javascript. I still find that the vast majority of sites suck.

I cannot change it by just avoiding most websites in defiance.

We cannot change much in this world. I don’t believe that I’m changing things by avoiding these sites which I don’t like. I can hope that more people will realize the same things I do and join me in avoiding such sites, but without numbers there’s nothing to be gained except personal comfort in the moment.

I don’t know what websites you’re using that still work without JavaScript, but they’re in the minority from what I can tell.

Well yeah, cuz (imo) most sites suck, lol. But even though they’re in the minority (like me, lol), there are lots of good sites which work very well without javascripts, like distrowatch, duckduckgo, feditrends, invidious, lemmy (for the most part), librey, mbin, redlib, rimgo, searxng, wikipedia, and lots of smaller niche sites. Lots of news sites are also pretty accessible, especially the ones that work with firefox reader mode. So, that list covers multiple options for search engines, fediverse platforms, mainstream social media frontends, wikipedia (and various other wikis on totally different sites), and lots of news & informational sites.

Some sites that don’t work quite as well are able to be fixed by simply switching from from “Basic Page Style” to “No Page Style” with Alt+v Y N (Menu -> View -> Page Style -> No Page Style). Lots of sites which appear totally blank can be fixed with that method. Granted, they don’t look so good, but the information is accessible. But that’s an example of a not-so-good site which is helped by disallowing javascipts and correcting the page. The truly good sites don’t require fucking with them like that.

So anyway, yeah. idk. I don’t see the issue. The sites which don’t work are the sites I have no interest in using. Allowing javascripts doesn’t tend to make them better in my view. And I think the stuff that legitimately needs scripts are better accessed as standalone apps (like matrix and other instant messengers which support end-to-end encryption). I think it’s better to use FOSS apps which have been reviewed by OS maintainers and others than to blindly allow sites to execute scripts through a browser.

But again, this is all just my perspective, my own experiences and opinions shaped from them. We each walk our own paths and have our own wants and needs, along with our own likes and dislikes. I just hope I’m able to be better understood by others who otherwise would have no idea why I and some others have chosen this path for ourselves.

(also, sorry if my walls of text are annoying.)

Those are websites I don’t want to use. As I’ve said in other comments, sites which break without javascript are what I consider broken sites. And I don’t like to use broken sites.

Almost all websites stop working

Another way of saying this: Most websites are broken and not worth accessing.

Like, have you seen the web? Most sites suck. lol. The good ones don’t bully/coerce me to change my behaviour.

I have a brand??! 🫨 (seriously tyvm 🩷) I’m currently going through my notifications and responding to stuff before using another qube to find that other chain of comments (and any new ones too). I am pretty obsessive ^^’ (and maybe trying to show more of myself here in the hopes that people can truly see me when I say things that matter)

Hey, so there are a few threads I can’t see from this instance due to defederations and I wanna respond anyway.

@Digit@lemmy.today open dyslexia font? nice touch.

Thanks. Yeah, it’s OpenDyslexicAlta Bold. It felt like a good option for a meme font that was kinda different and maybe easy enough to read to make it useful too.

@Onomatopoeia@lemmy.cafe That makes it easier for dyslexics?

Possibly for some, as @Ludicrous0251@piefed.zip said. I think it would probably be more beneficial for those who are introduced to it at a young age. Otherwise it takes some time to get used to it, and I did end up falling back to the fonts I had been using. But I do like OpenDyslexicAlta font and think it makes a good meme font, so yeah.

Okay so that’s my response to the chain of comments quoted above. Sorry I can’t give y’all upvotes due to the defederation, and sorry it took me so long to realize there were comments which were hidden from me. I do try my best to respond to everything that seems directed at me or which I can offer a worthwhile response.

The next chain of comments is much longer (it’s a really good one too), and I’m thinking I’ll make one or more responses when I get back online a while from now.

🩷

I was talking about my own experiences. We can agree to disagree on what is a better user experience, as it’s inherently subjective. I can’t think of a site I’ve come across that was made better by javascripts, from my own perspective and experiences. I have always been let down and frustrated by such sites and always relieved to find static sites.

It is only your opinion that dynamic UI elements aren’t worth it.

Yes. And for all of the reasons I’ve given, I stand by my opinions on javascripts. You’re free to disagree. I wasn’t trying to convince anyone, just sharing my experiences and opinions on them.

Sorry if I came across as dismissive of your experiences and opinions.

In reality now it’s used for full on software applications.

I think software applications are better made as actual applications instead of browser-based web-apps.

it’s also used for dynamically updating the UI.

It might seem useful on the surface but is prone to the same sorts of breakage and annoyances I was talking about.

A world you speak of would mean much worse order forms, paperwork for doctors, etc. I mean you do you, but you can’t just not acknowledge that dynamic updates of a UI are better than filling out a long form then getting back “invalid data, you selected this and entered that, start over”.

That’s an interesting example, because that’s happened to both of my parents within the past few months from two different healthcare-related sites. The javascript elements frustrated them more than me, since they didn’t understand why certain things weren’t working, and I had to figure it out for them. And there were a few times when we had to start over due to the sites being poorly made.

That’s really what I see in this reliance on javascripts, corner-cutting which causes problems. Properly-configured sites work better, and the ones reliant on javascript tend not to be.

I would prefer static order forms so that I can have the entire form and fill it out before submitting, while retaining a copy so that if there were issues I could more quickly and efficiently resubmit with the corrections.

Some people might prefer the dynamically updating UI stuff, but except for live chats I can’t see a good use for it that static pages can’t do better. And I think live chats are better in non-web apps which support end-to-end encryption anyway.

The tracking concerns are mostly mitigated by vpns, ad blockers, and private browser features.

The most useful and efficient private browsing feature is the ability to disable javascripts. Using vpns and ad-blockers protects against very specific vectors of surveillance, while javascripts allow a diverse set of surveillance capabilities, so blocking them protects against several forms of surveillance. And with more people disabling javascripts, we all blend together better.

you may prefer static documents, but modern society is built on forms and other types of vital apps, which would inevitably be worse without javascript.

Modern society is also built on ignorance, conformity, and exploitation, all of which make javascript-based sites more dangerous and prone to issues. It’s the easy answer thrown at every problem, like “a.i.” and is similarly dangerous.

I will give qubes-whonix a shot, you have convinced me!

You definitely shouldn’t rush into Qubes OS. If you’re seriously interested, I’d recommend checking out videos and reading about it so you can understand it a little deeper.

Out of curiosity, what harm are you concerned about JavaScript doing with an ad blocker and while loading sites within a container? That seems extreme to me.

Besides that fact that javascripts can be used to track and profile users, they also make the user experience of sites worse. I love static pages. Sites that require javascripts are the polar opposite of that. Useless blur effects and other “features” can cause pages to be significantly slower than static pages, and I absolutely hate it. I should be able to scroll smoothly and click buttons once the page has loaded, and I should be able to keep pages cached indefinitely. With javascripts, scrolling can often be laggy, buttons can appear and disappear in odd ways, and pages can be automatically reloaded without my consent, causing lots of frustrations. I cannot understand how anyone prefers browsing the web with javascripts. They are a fucking cancer, like 99% of the time.

Okay I just did some cursory research and it doesn’t sound simple. Is it just installing qubes-whonix and creating a template (I’m guessing a yaml config or similar)?

During the installation of Qubes OS, you can select a checkbox to have Whonix templates and qubes automatically installed. After installation, you can simply click a launcher to start an app like Tor browser in a new disposable whonix qube from the disposable whonix template. It really is that simple. Installing Qubes OS does take a while though.

As far as sites with JavaScript being “broken”, that one puzzles me. I have tried turning off JavaScript in the past and probably 70% of websites became fully non functional.

Yes, those sites which become non-functional without javascripts are very much broken.

That shouldn’t be the case, but it often is, and my impression has been that this has gotten worse, not better.

Yes, much of the web is broken. On a related note, much of the web is infested with malicious ads and trackers.

I’m a web developer and no one talks about progressive enhancement anymore and frankly my coworkers have mostly thought it’s silly to even try to support users who turn off JavaScript.

That’s a shame. And yeah, those are basically just dead sites. If they’re non-functional then there’s really no point for them to exist.

As the web continues to devolve, with a growing graveyard of dead sites (and an increasing prevalence of malicious scripts), I hope that more people wake up to the reality that this is bad. It’s similar to the dead-end that is google’s android. Eventually they’ll pull it away and leave a lot of people scrambling for their next option. I think the modern web will go through a similar transformation one day. I hope so.

Bottom left is a super-convenient built-in feature of Qubes OS, via qubes-whonix. I just click a button and a new disposable whonix qube is generated from the template, and it only takes seconds to boot. When I’m done with it, I close the window, and the disposable qube is automatically deleted.

Bottom right is my default, since I don’t like broken sites.